RB$ circling the wagons for fellow RBs

[Big Blitz]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

True - glad someone saying the position is vital bc it is (see Bills Red Zone issues)

 

[maddenboy]

but . . . you chose to play the position.

 

you chose to pursue something where, if you are excellent, you make about 1/4 of what an excellent QB makes.

 

And where is the extra money supposed to come from, to pay a running back?

 

-----

 

(I'm not one, but) its kinda like a foot doctor complaining that he isnt paid like a brain surgeon.  I mean, they ARE both doctors, right? 

 

if you wanna be paid like a brain surgeon, you shoulda been one.  Or, if you wanna be paid like the rest of us, I hear UPS is hiring.

[BillsFanForever19]

2 minutes ago, maddenboy said:

but . . . you chose to play the position.

 

you chose to pursue something where, if you are excellent, you make about 1/4 of what an excellent QB makes.

 

And where is the extra money supposed to come from, to pay a running back?

 

-----

 

(I'm not one, but) its kinda like a foot doctor complaining that he isnt paid like a brain surgeon.  I mean, they ARE both doctors, right? 

 

if you wanna be paid like a brain surgeon, you shoulda been one.  Or, if you wanna be paid like the rest of us, I hear UPS is hiring.

 

Not really a fair comparison. You make it sound like any star RB could have been a star QB if they chose. Totally different skill sets. 

[maddenboy]

no.  I make it sound like "you got what you got."

 

Its not his fault that he isnt 6 foot 10 so he can play in the NBA.   But as he looked around, he decided "you know what, my best bet to make millions is to play football.  Coaches told me to be a running back.  Even teenagers know running backs dont get paid like WRs or DBs or even TEs.  So i had a decision to make.  And i made it."

[Doc Brown]

34 minutes ago, maddenboy said:

but . . . you chose to play the position.

 

you chose to pursue something where, if you are excellent, you make about 1/4 of what an excellent QB makes.

 

And where is the extra money supposed to come from, to pay a running back?

 

-----

 

(I'm not one, but) its kinda like a foot doctor complaining that he isnt paid like a brain surgeon.  I mean, they ARE both doctors, right? 

 

if you wanna be paid like a brain surgeon, you shoulda been one.  Or, if you wanna be paid like the rest of us, I hear UPS is hiring.

To be fair we're only four years away from Zeke getting a 6 year 90 million dollar contract with 50 million guaranteed.  The running backs complaining now didn't know how quickly the position would become devalued growing up.

[Virgil]

If so many backs didn’t fall of a cliff around 27, this wouldn’t be an issue.  Most of these guys are up for a contract around 26.  
 

Would you pay someone for 5 years knowing you might only get 2-3 good years out of them?  

Why do they burn out?  Age and playing in the NFL.  So I do feel for them, because it’s league who makes them break down in their late 20’s

 

To me, the fix would be, all Rookie RBs get 3 year rookie deals, regardless of when drafted.  

[QCity]

I know the RB's are mad, but SharpFootball and Matt Miller are completely correct (I've been saying it for years too, Matt). After 5+ years in the NFL RB's start breaking down and can't stay on the field, and when you pay an aging star RB top dollar, you typically can't afford to spend resources (draft picks or money) on quality backups at the position. 

 

It's the unfortunate reality of today's game.

 

It's a much shrewder move to go bargain shopping for 2-3 cheap upper-tier RB's and invest that money saved into some road-grading offensive linemen. Now you have redundancy in case an RB goes down and an improved OL that can not only open holes but protect your QB.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

Where are the protests about how punters or kickers or long snappers don’t get paid either? 
 

it’s about market value of the position.
 

This isn’t a RB league anymore. It’s a passing league. It’s also why QB, WR, and TE salaries have shot way up. 

[Simon]

God has blessed you with a body and skillset that enables you to become a multimillionaire just for playing a game and then retiring in your thirties, free and wealthy for the rest of your life.

But that's still not enough and the world owes you more.

Go hump some shingles, you spoiled rotten little brats.

[Doc Brown]

25 minutes ago, Virgil said:

If so many backs didn’t fall of a cliff around 27, this wouldn’t be an issue.  Most of these guys are up for a contract around 26.  
 

Would you pay someone for 5 years knowing you might only get 2-3 good years out of them?  

Why do they burn out?  Age and playing in the NFL.  So I do feel for them, because it’s league who makes them break down in their late 20’s

 

To me, the fix would be, all Rookie RBs get 3 year rookie deals, regardless of when drafted.  

Smart teams would still just cycle through RB's on a three year cost controlled rookie deal and not re-sign them.  Getting rid of the rookie wage minimum scale for RB's or reducing eligibility requirements to enter the NFL draft would help somewhat.  However, then players at other positions would complain.  I don't see an easy fix.

[MJS]

The issue isn't so much that RB's aren't valuable to an offense. They are. It's just that it is fairly easy to find a good RB who can produce for you. If RB's were more scarce, they would be in higher demand and make more money.

[JoPoy88]

The star RBs are never going to get teams to budge on handing out bigger money to veteran backs who are 26-27 years old. The positional value and average career length just isn’t there

 

What would be feasible and fairer to these guys is altering the rookie contract structure for RBs and set their max term lower than other positions. 2 or 3 year rookie terms would allow RBs to get to FA sooner with more of their future value intact. The truly great ones would get more and better offers. All the rest would get what they get or fall by the wayside. 

[BillsfaninSB]

I do sympathize with the RB.  They heavily sacrifice themselves.  Not just getting tackled but also blocking guys who could be 100 lbs larger than them routinely. 

 

I think the first franchise tag should be two years, not one, at the next increment of player.  Usually TE.  This year it would be $11.3M.  RBs would get +$22M.  They would be thrown on scrap heap after that but at least they would get a great nest egg for the rest of their life.   Do this for all RBs regardless of when drafted.  Also, give them the option of refusing the tag so they can test the open market and not be forced to hold out. 

[BullBuchanan]

I hope the NFLPA does something to address this at the next collective bargaining session. Perhaps giving RBs a one-way contract void after their 2nd year for a first round pick or their rookie year for a 2nd round+ would be a way to force teams to compensate them fairly. Alternatively, they could force a RB specific rookie wage scale. We all know that you don't want to pay an aging back, but you should have to pay a young one. It's become pretty clear RBs got hosed the most by the rookie wage scale.

They contribute massively to the offensive production of teams but get a pittance in compensation compared to their counterparts.

[Don Otreply]

When every one of them is a top three percent or better wage earner annually in America, why is anyone feeling sorry for them, when the vast majority of Americans make far less annually, and ya know what, they would give their eye teeth for just one years worth of a RBs wages…, folks perspective is really out of wack on these guys incomes, they all make large money compared to the ninety fifth percentile and lower of all wage earners in America and world wide, F ing cry babies is what they are, don’t piss your money away and get a god da-n job when your time in football is over, it ain’t rocket science. 

Edited July 18, 2023 by Don Otreply

[Buffalo_Stampede]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

I hope the NFLPA does something to address this at the next collective bargaining session. Perhaps giving RBs a one-way contract void after their 2nd year for a first round pick or their rookie year for a 2nd round+ would be a way to force teams to compensate them fairly. Alternatively, they could force a RB specific rookie wage scale. We all know that you don't want to pay an aging back, but you should have to pay a young one. It's become pretty clear RBs got hosed the most by the rookie wage scale.

They contribute massively to the offensive production of teams but get a pittance in compensation compared to their counterparts.

It’s not just about aging RB’s, it’s about the quantity of RB’s. RB is the easiest position to find a replacement. I actually don’t know what the solution would be.

 

For regular people it works the same way. You get paid based on how many people can do your job equally as well. Cashiers at Walmart get paid a low wage because there are millions of people that can do the job.

 

I don’t know if anything can help RB’s because the NFL is all about passing now. If they had shorter deals I think some RBs would get paid but the majority of them still would be replaced with cheaper options.

 

I think teams will just avoid drafting RBs all together if they become too expensive. You don’t win Championships when your RB is the the focus of the offense. RBs will end up like FB’s soon enough. 
 

 

[Thrivefourfive]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

To be fair we're only four years away from Zeke getting a 6 year 90 million dollar contract with 50 million guaranteed.  The running backs complaining now didn't know how quickly the position would become devalued growing up.

All it took was one loose, far-sighted owner to drop the ball and pay one. What ended up happening wasn’t good. Elliott declined, as excepted, and is living out a pretty typical RB league career as one of the best of the decade. He’s done — but probably ended up getting paid for his three excellent years, two good ones, and some others. However, nobody wants to see their player get paid and then rapidly decline. Just leaves a bad taste. So all the RBs wanting their bag can thank Elliott for showing GMs and owners that it’s a bad decision for the team. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

34 minutes ago, Thrivefourfive said:

All it took was one loose, far-sighted owner to drop the ball and pay one. What ended up happening wasn’t good. Elliott declined, as excepted, and is living out a pretty typical RB league career as one of the best of the decade. He’s done — but probably ended up getting paid for his three excellent years, two good ones, and some others. However, nobody wants to see their player get paid and then rapidly decline. Just leaves a bad taste. So all the RBs wanting their bag can thank Elliott for showing GMs and owners that it’s a bad decision for the team. 

Zeke was only 23-24 years old when he signed that deal.

 

As I said earlier some RBs will get a big deal if they had shorter rookie contracts, probably less than 5, but teams will still be able to find cheaper options. Tony Pollard has been the better option for the Cowboys the last couple years and he was a much cheaper option.

 

Problem for Pollard is now he’s getting too expensive and will be replaced soon.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Buffalo_Stampede

[QCity]

25 minutes ago, Thrivefourfive said:

All it took was one loose, far-sighted owner to drop the ball and pay one. What ended up happening wasn’t good. Elliott declined, as excepted, and is living out a pretty typical RB league career as one of the best of the decade. He’s done — but probably ended up getting paid for his three excellent years, two good ones, and some others. However, nobody wants to see their player get paid and then rapidly decline. Just leaves a bad taste. So all the RBs wanting their bag can thank Elliott for showing GMs and owners that it’s a bad decision for the team. 

 

It was a more than just Elliott. Todd Gurley's 4yr/$60M deal blew up in their faces. Kamara's 4TD season last year certainly isn't why they gave him 5yr/$75M. Listening to Jets fans crow about getting Le'Veon Bell for $50M and watching him instantly crash and burn was funny. Carolina gave CMC $65M and he wound up playing like 2 games that year. I believe next year he missed half the season and ultimately they cut bait. There's more I'm missing I'm sure.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

16 minutes ago, QCity said:

 

It was a more than just Elliott. Todd Gurley's 4yr/$60M deal blew up in their faces. Kamara's 4TD season last year certainly isn't why they gave him 5yr/$75M. Listening to Jets fans crow about getting Le'Veon Bell for $50M and watching him instantly crash and burn was funny. Carolina gave CMC $65M and he wound up playing like 2 games that year. I believe next year he missed half the season and ultimately they cut bait. There's more I'm missing I'm sure.

Another one. Gurley only 23 years old when he got paid. So it’s not about age. It’s about the position. 
 

The Rams are a great example. They have struggled to replace Gurley but they still won a Super Bowl with his replacements. They had a RB by committee that year.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Buffalo_Stampede